>>35
I type without moving my lips or opening my mouth.
It's not my fault if people don't examine their own assumptions, nor like it very much when someone does it for them.
It cannot be demonstrated that one form of human labelling is inherently better than any other, that can only be determined by what is being discussed and what conclusions are being drawn, and I don't really see what the problem is with stating it.
It is as absurd for someone to say "science is best" as it is for someone to say "wicca is best", meaning "in all cases" as we've had implied here. The only reason we have come to adopt this acceptance of people who assert the former is that science makes a lot of money. If wiccan bullshit made as much profit as modern empirical science, then the opposite would hold.